Influence of injection rate in determining the development of artifacts during the acquisition of dynamic arterial phase in Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI studies.
Gadoxetic acid-DTPA (Gd-EOB-DTPA)
Injection rate
Liver
Magnetic resonance imaging
Journal
Magma (New York, N.Y.)
ISSN: 1352-8661
Titre abrégé: MAGMA
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9310752
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2021
Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
10
03
2020
accepted:
09
06
2020
revised:
06
06
2020
pubmed:
21
6
2020
medline:
18
9
2021
entrez:
21
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess whether different Gd-EOB-DTPA injection rates could influence the development of artifacts during the arterial phase of liver MRI studies. All Gd-EOB-DTPA liver MRI studies performed for different clinical indications at a single tertiary referral center were retrospectively evaluated. Each examination was acquired on a 1.5 T scanner with T1 In- and Out-of-Phase, T2 with and without fat-saturation, DWI, and 3D-T1 fat-sat dynamic sequences. Patients were divided into two groups according to the injection rate (1 ml/s and 1.5 ml/s). A single radiologist recorded the presence or absence of artifacts during different acquisition phases, respectively: (1) all examination; (2) only during the arterial phase; (3) only during the portal-venous phase; (4) both in arterial and portal-venous phases. From a total of 748 MRI studies performed, 229 were excluded due to the presence of artifacts during the entire examination. The remaining 519 MRI studies were divided into two groups according to the injection rate. The first group (flow rate = 1 ml/s) was composed by 312 (60.1%) patients and the second group (flow rate = 1.5 ml/s) by 207 (39.9%) patients. In the first group, 2 (0.6%) patients showed artifacts in all dynamic sequences; 13 (4%) only in the arterial phase, 16 (5%) only in the portal-venous phase, and 38 (12%) both in arterial and portal-venous phases; a total of 243 (78%) showed no artifacts. In the second group, 3 (1.5%) patients had artifacts in all dynamic sequences, 82 (40%) only in the arterial phase, 20 (10%) only in the portal-venous phase, and 53 (25%) both in arterial and portal-venous phases; a total of 49 (23.5%) showed no artifacts. A significant difference between the two groups regarding the absence of artifacts in all examination and the presence of artifacts only during the arterial phase was found (p < 0.001). The development of artifacts during the arterial phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA liver MRI studies could be related to the injection rate and its reduction may help to decrease the incidence of artifacts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32562201
doi: 10.1007/s10334-020-00857-1
pii: 10.1007/s10334-020-00857-1
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
gadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA
0
Gadolinium DTPA
K2I13DR72L
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
133-140Références
Semelka RC, Shoenut P, Kroeker MA et al (1992) Focal liver disease: comparison of dynamic contrast enhanced CT and T2-weighted fat-suppressed, FLASH and dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology 184:687
doi: 10.1148/radiology.184.3.1324509
Semelka RC, Martin DR, Balci C et al (2001) Focal liver lesions: comparison of dual phase CT and multisequence multiplanar MR imaging including dynamic gadolinium enhancement. J Magn Reson Imaging 13:397–401
doi: 10.1002/jmri.1057
Bellin MF, Vasile M, Morel-Precetti S (2003) Currently used non-specific extracellular MR contrast media. Eur Radiol 13:2688–2698
doi: 10.1007/s00330-003-1912-x
Balci NC, Semelka RC (2005) Contrast agents for MR imaging of the liver. Radiol Clin N Am 43:887–898
doi: 10.1016/j.rcl.2005.05.004
van Montfoort JE, Stieger B, Meijer DK, Weinmann HJ, Meier PJ, Fattinger KE (1999) Hepatic uptake of the magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent gadoxetate by the organic anion transporting polypeptide Oatp1. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 290:153–157
pubmed: 10381771
Seale MK, Catalano OA, Saini S, Hahn PF, Sahani DV (2009) Hepatobiliary-specific MR contrast agents: role in imaging the liver and biliary tree. Radiographics 29:1725–1748
doi: 10.1148/rg.296095515
Semelka RC, Helmberger TK (2001) Contrast agents for MR imaging of the liver. Radiology 218:27–33
doi: 10.1148/radiology.218.1.r01ja2427
Neri E, Bali MA, Ba-Ssalamah A, Boraschi P, Brancatelli G, Alves FC, Grazioli L, Helmberger T, Lee JM, Manfredi R, Martì-Bonmatì L, Matos C, Merkle EM, Op DeBeeck B, Schima W, Skehan S, Vilgrain V, Zech C, Bartolozzi C (2016) ESGAR consensus statement on liver MR imaging and clinical use of liver-specific contrast agents. Eur Radiol 26(4):921–931. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3900-3 (Epub 2015 Jul 21, PMID: 26194455, PMCID: PMC4778143)
doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3900-3
pubmed: 26194455
Gupta RT, Iseman CM, Leyendecker JR, Shyknevsky I, Merkle EM, Taouli B (2012) Diagnosis of focal nodular hyperplasia with MRI: multicenter retrospective study comparing gadobenate dimeglumine to gadoxetate disodium. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:35–43
doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.7757
Karam AR, Shankar S, Surapaneni P, Kim YH, Hussain S (2010) Focal nodular hyperplasia: central scar enhancement pattern using gadoxetate disodium. J Magn Reson Imaging 32:341–344
doi: 10.1002/jmri.22262
Park Y, Kim SH, Kim SH et al (2010) Gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI versus gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA)-enhanced MRI for preoperatively detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: an initial experience. Korean J Radiol 11:433–440
doi: 10.3348/kjr.2010.11.4.433
Ringe KI, Husarik DB, Sirlin CB, Merkle EM (2010) Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI of the liver: part 1, protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the noncirrhotic liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195(1):13–28. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.4392 (Preview PubMed PMID: 20566794)
doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.4392
pubmed: 20566794
Czervionke LF, Czervionke JM, Daniels DL, Haughton VM (1988) Characteristic features of MR truncation artifacts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 151(6):1219–1228 (PubMed PMID: 3263776)
doi: 10.2214/ajr.151.6.1219
Haradome H, Grazioli L, Tsunoo M et al (2010) Can MR fluoroscopic triggering technique and slow rate injection provide appropriate arterial phase images with reducing artifacts on gadoxetic acid-DTPA (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced hepatic MR imaging? J Magn Reson Imaging JMRI 32(2):334–340
doi: 10.1002/jmri.22241
Pietryga JA, Burke LM, Marin D, Jaffe TA, Bashir MR (2014) Respiratory motion artifact affecting hepatic arterial phase imaging with gadoxetate disodium: examination recovery with a multiple arterial phase acquisition. Radiology 271(2):426–434
doi: 10.1148/radiol.13131988
Yoo JL, Lee CH, Park YS et al (2016) The short breath-hold technique, controlled aliasing in parallel imaging results in higher acceleration, can be the first step to overcoming a degraded hepatic arterial phase in liver magnetic resonance imaging: a prospective randomized control study. Investig Radiol 51(7):440–446
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000249
Kim YK, Lin WC, Sung K et al (2017) Reducing artifacts during arterial phase of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MR imaging: dilution method versus reduced injection rate. Radiology 283(2):429–437
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016160241
McClellan TR, Motosugi U, Middleton MS et al (2017) Intravenous gadoxetate disodium administration reduces breath-holding capacity in the hepatic arterial phase: a multi-center randomized placebo-controlled trial. Radiology 282(2):361–368
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016160482
Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J et al (2005) Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Investig Radiol 40:715–724
doi: 10.1097/01.rli.0000184756.66360.d3
Ringe KI et al (2010) Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI of the liver: part 1, protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the noncirrhotic liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195(1):13–28. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.4392
doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.4392
pubmed: 20566794
Grazioli L et al (2018) Evaluation of incidence of acute transient dyspnea and related artifacts after administration of gadoxetate disodium: a prospective observational study. La Radiol Med 123(12):910–917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-018-0927-y
doi: 10.1007/s11547-018-0927-y
Yoon JH, Lee JM, Yu MH, Kim EJ, Han JK (2016) Triple arterial phase MR imaging with gadoxetic acid using a combination of contrast enhanced time robust angiography, keyhole, and viewsharing techniques and two-dimensional parallel imaging in comparison with conventional single arterial phase. Korean J Radiol 17(4):522–532. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2016.17.4.522
doi: 10.3348/kjr.2016.17.4.522
pubmed: 27390543
pmcid: 4936174
Zech CJ, Vos B, Nordell A et al (2009) Vascular enhancement in early dynamic liver MR imaging in an animal model: comparison of two injection regimen and two different doses Gd-EOB-DTPA (gadoxetic acid) with standard Gd-DTPA. Investig Radiol 44:305–310
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181a24512
Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Sou H et al (2009) Dilution method of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylene-triaminepenta-acetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). J Magn Reson Imaging 30:849–854
doi: 10.1002/jmri.21913
Tamada T, Ito K, Yoshida K, Kanki A, Higaki A, Tanimoto D, Higashi H (2011) Comparison of three different injection methods for arterial phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MR imaging of the liver. Eur J Radiol 80(3):e284–e288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.12.082 (Epub 2011 Feb 5 PubMed PMID: 21296514)
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.12.082
pubmed: 21296514
McVeigh ER et al (1985) Noise and filtration in magnetic resonance imaging. Med Phys 12(5):586–591. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.595679
doi: 10.1118/1.595679
pubmed: 4046992
pmcid: 2169200
Huang SY et al (2015) Body MR imaging: artifacts, k-space, and solutions. Radiographics 35(5):1439–1460. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2015140289
doi: 10.1148/rg.2015140289
pubmed: 26207581
pmcid: 4613875
Vikhoff-Baaz B et al (2001) Effects of k-space filtering and image interpolation on image fidelity in 1H MRSI. Magn Reson Imaging 19(9):1227–1234. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0730-725x(01)00456-8
doi: 10.1016/s0730-725x(01)00456-8
pubmed: 11755733
Block KT et al (2008) Suppression of MRI truncation artifacts using total variation constrained data extrapolation. Int J Biomed Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1155/2008/184123
doi: 10.1155/2008/184123
pubmed: 18784847
pmcid: 2531202
Bellin M-F (2006) MR contrast agents, the old and the new. Eur J Radiol 60(3):314–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.06.021
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.06.021
pubmed: 17005349